Hello, this is my first post on the forums. I have actively read LXF for a good few years now and uncannily like Big Johns post bellow I was already to stop buying the mag.

Why? because I came to realise that through the hype of linux on the desktop, it has never came to realisation and the LXF mag had seemingly lost sight of this. Again uncannilly enough I open the recent magazine and what do I see the very same sentiment poured out by the LXF team..

you.. [insert expletive] ( you realy do care )

I was all ready to give up on linux (for a while anyway) - thinking that linux needs more time and that the magazine has lost touch with the ordinary user, even though most of my friends consider me a computer geek, in the world of Linux I will never be.

Linux on the desktop is missing the boat, OSx will be available for x86 and will be gunning for Microsoft's share of the OS market. If only the forks and branches of the linux world (which is of course its advantage in many ways) united to produce the killer desktop OS. Yes the OS your granny could use and navigate easily, that you could maintain for them without having to learn more CLI linux, arcane methods of configuration to get it operational. Yes there will always be those privelleged, enthusiastic and tallented users who will use the CLI constantly to achieve their aims and more power to them, but for us mere mortals, who gave up the CLI at Dos6.2, who eagerly in their youth edited the Autoexec.bat and config.sys of just to free up more base memory to get Duke Nukem to work, or get the CDROM working, the world has moved on. Like it or not GUI for the ordinary user is and should be the only way forward. If I need to remember any more commands and editing I am afraid my familly will be doing without Birthday cards /presents / weekly shopping etc...

I think I shall start my own distro JBL linux (joe bloggs obv.) Really once linux gets there, and it shouldnt be that far off (although as the article in LXF magazine stated its seems to be pulling in the oppsoite direction just now) : once the joe bloggs user base is installed, the vendors will fall over themselves to provide drivers and support for their products in linux, and the future prosperity of linux (not just finacially) is inextricably linked not just to to the hardcore users, developers and coders but also with the joe bloggs users and the hardware vendors.

Whew.. sorry but I feel better now for that...

My suggestion, an on going newbie article ( or preferably a suppliment like linux pro that used to accompany the mag) in which the writter picks a standard newb friendly disto on a typical machine, installing, configuring and more importantly getting some of the interesting software on the DVD every month installed and working on the machine, and relating some articles like the latest security article, video editing etc.. to the newb setup.

go on LXF do your bit to promote and support newbs to Linux ensuring that it is a fun, productive, and fruitfull experience.

There are distros around for the newbie which are GUI orientated, even some that look and feel like Windblows to use. I used to sell PCs pre-loaded with Linux in the local area and give free tutition on them. Even people that had never used a PC before got on well with it.

yeah I know of these, believe me I have tried most distros, each having thier own advantages and each excelling in thier own way.

Most of those distros you are limited to using thier own software repositories etc... Im not a total newb in the sense, I guess I am just getting older and lazy I would rather spend time using the software than configuring.

If your gran needs a linux rig, you can't really get simpler or more integrated than linspire which, aside from the extra charges which are not essential, its pretty spot on, so easy to use its rediculous.

c0rd0bes wrote:OSx will be available for x86 and will be gunning for Microsoft's share of the OS market.

It won't be available for generic x86 boxes -- it'll be available for Apple Macs. In that sense, I don't see how (as many people have suggested) it'll suddenly become a much bigger competitor to Windows. For consumers, it'll be absolutely no different -- to run OS X, you'll have to go out and buy a Mac. It'll just be a different CPU architecture inside (which is of no interest to most buyers).

If OS X was released for generic x86 machines, then it could make a difference, although that'd impact Apple's hardware sales. Essentially, to the average user, the only difference Apple's Intel switch makes is slightly faster machines, possibly at a slightly lower price.

And even if someone successfully hacks the first full OS X/x86 release to run on vanilla hardware (could be difficult depending on the amount of custom bits 'n bobs in the box), that won't suddenly threaten Microsoft either. Aunt Meg, if she even knows what OS X is, won't mess around on **** sites trying to find .torrents of hax0red OS X ISOs to burn to DVD.

gentlemen thank you all for your replies, I shall check out the distros mentioned here.

I guess I should make it clear I am not having a pop at the LXF mag as I have learned more about computing from LXF and linux than I ever did anywhere else. I guess its my frustration that my abilities are not as great as my expectations, and I know than whilst linux is a great OS, it could be much more.

As regards the Osx on x86 yes I agree that it is only unlegit versions that will be or are available. But surely Apple must be tempted, after all the Mac brigade are a select type; graphic designers, journos and hairdressers - just kidding , but seriously, I think apple can rely on their base users to still buy the hardware whilst opening the Osx to the whole x86 vannila and all.

I guess I am probably a tad frightened that if this ever did happen, linux on the desktop for the ordinary user would suffer for another Xyears, whilst ordinary users would be happy for a "choice" of OS, all be it proprietry.

c0rd0bes wrote:I think apple can rely on their base users to still buy the hardware whilst opening the Osx to the whole x86 vannila and all.

I doubt it -- Mac Minis may be cheap in terms of Apple hardware, but they still don't compare to what the likes of Dell and other big box-shifters can offer. For instance, you can get a full Dell PC with 2.4 GHz CPU, 512 MB RAM and a monitor for £291 inc. VAT. To get a Mac Mini with monitor and the same RAM, you're looking at nearly twice the price. Similarly, you can get Dell laptops for about £350 now. Yes, it isn't the greatest hardware quality in the world, but Macs are using pretty much the same components now, and Apple has had its fair share of reliability problems recently (eg the logic board nightmares).

Also, Apple would be expected to support a massive range of hardware, and once a load of half-assed device drivers have been written by third parties, reliability could suffer (as seen so often on Windows). Right now, Apple sells an 'appliance' where the hardware and software is well integrated -- so making it available to a trajillion combinations of PC hardware would lose that appeal.

Rhakios wrote:Maybe, I am in the process of getting it via bittorrent. Why? Because for yet another limited time, it's free!.

What quality timing that is!! Mr Robertson must have been watching these forums

Shame that the servers have been /.'ed But definitely worth trying to download, its certainly the distro I'd recommend to a lot of those who coudln't get on with Mandriva, Suse etc.....after Slackware of course

Bittorrent went very well, and I left it running until today to give others a chance. I expect there's no chance of getting it via http or ftp due to the huge amount of interest shown. Linspire must be doing something right, or is it a case of no-one being able to ignore a freebie?

Rhakios, how long did it take? I've been trying on/off for a couple of days, each time it would say "server too busy". Today my request went through, on http there is 800 long waiting list, droping about 1 a minute. On the torrent, Im getting between 2 and 5k a second! Its like being on dialup again At this rate, its looking like 45hours!

Strangely Im not getting any upload speed at all, checked the firewall and the correct settings are in place, so not too sure whats going on with that...

...pause, I was getting 2-5k/sec but its stalled, its obviously a tad more popular than they probably expected. Probably the right thing to do, as they put a lot of work into 5 and were not getting a huge amount of exposure, maybe they can see the money potential in the support and third party apps so it won't be a huge loss to them as people who possibly would not have used it will now pay of the extra bits when they realise its actually pretty good.

EDIT
Im not sure this is sending out quite the right impression, after 4 hours the torrent has completed 25MB and uploaded 10MB and its been doing nothing for that last 30mins.
My HTTP queue had got down to 445, then it kindly bumped me back to 1200 for no reason I can see (it had not offered links etc).

I think I'll leave it, there was probably something somewhere stopping me from passing it on to freinds + fam anyway.

As always bittorrent started slowly, but picked up after about half an hour or so. It finished in just over 4 hours.
Which client are you using? I don't know if it makes a difference, but I find Azureus very good (on the few occasions I need to use it) and with sensible defaults. I usually set my upload to just below what the line can take as that way I appear generous but don't swamp my upload bandwidth to the detriment of what I can download, but I'm sure you know all about this sort of thing so I'll stop rambling.